2006 Mock Draft

by Angels and Demons on Jan 8, 2006 8:49 PM EST

I wanted to do something new and try to create a mock draft for the first-year player draft. I've only seen mock drafts created 2 to 5 five weeks before the draft and never months before. For obvious reasons though but I thought I'd give it a shot. Thoughts?

Royals - LHP - Andrew Miller
Rockies - RHP - Dallas Buck
Devil Rays - RHP - Max Scherzer
Pirates - RHP - Kyle Drabek
Mariners - INF - Evan Longoria
Tigers - 3B - Wes Hodges
Dodgers - 1B - Matt LaPorta
Reds - RHP - Matt Latos
Orioles - RHP - Ian Kennedy
Giants - OF - Drew Stubbs
Diamondbacks - RHP - Daniel Bard
Rangers - RHP - Jordan Walden
Cubs - RF - Cody Johnson
Blue Jays - LHP - Kasey Kiker
Nationals - RHP - Brandon Morrow
Brewers - RHP - Jared Hughes
Padres - OF - Riley Cooper
Phillies - 3B - Matt Antonelli
Marlins - 2B - Justin Bristow
Twins - 3B - Chris Marrero
Yankees - LHP - Brett Anderson
Nationals - RHP - Joba Chamberlain
Astros - SS - Jason Donald
Braves - OF - Jeff Ropaport
Indians - LF - Mark Hamilton
Nationals - C - Mike Ambort
Red Sox - RHP - Brad Lincoln
Braves - C - Max Sapp
White Sox - RHP - Dellin Betances
Cardinals - OF - John Tolisano

0 recs | Comment 32 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

dodgers pick

i dont think the dodgers will be drafting a 1b that high. Try focusing on a HS power arm with clean mechanics or high ceiling prep bat. or if drew stubbs fell, he could fill the need of a high cieling OF (preferbly CFer).

by npurcell on Jan 8, 2006 8:58 PM EST 0 recs

dodgers pick

I figure with Billingsley, Broxton, Horchaver, and Tiffany, the Dodgers probably won't be all that interested in drafting pitching in the first round. Drafting Drew Stubbs would seem more probable but the Dodgers have had a need for a first baseman for quite some time. Not to mention LaPorta is viewed as the most polished power bat in the draft.

by Angels and Demons on Jan 8, 2006 9:25 PM EST up 0 recs

Laporta

i actually really like laporta. his Bat basically is a thunderstick. that said, i dont see logan white drafting a 1b that high.

if laporta can play a servicable OF, then it could be a possibility. but he does have 40 homer potential.

by npurcell on Jan 8, 2006 9:50 PM EST up 0 recs

Dodgers

Angels and Demons, the Dodgers don't have Hochevar and don't figure to sign him, and Broxton has been turned into a bullpen arm. Tiffany's ceiling probably isn't that high. Starting in 2007, the Dodgers' first baseman will be James Loney. A lot of people who post on this board don't like Loney, but obviously it is what the Dodgers think of Loney that is really relevent, and they like him a great deal.

Nate is correct, the Dodgers are most likely to go after a high-ceiling HS pitcher. (Andrew Miller will be gone by the time the Dodgers pick, and Scherzer is a Boras client.) Logan White runs the Dodgers' drafts, and he believes there is no such thing as having too much young pitching, given injury rates for young pitchers. I think if the draft were held tomorrow, the Dodgers would draft either Drabek, Walden, or Latos.

by CanuckDodger on Jan 8, 2006 10:01 PM EST up 0 recs

Scott Elbert

Canuck, off topic question:

Do you know how the Dodgers view Scott Elbert? I have read something (I believe it was BA) that stated that scouts believe he profiles best as a reliever. I am sure Elbert will continue to start next season, but do you see a transition there?

by count sutton on Jan 9, 2006 2:14 PM EST up 0 recs

Elbert

Count Sutton, the BA writer who has handled the Dodgers' system the last two years, Alan Matthews, said in one of his chats that some scouts calling Elbert a future closer shouldn't be taken too seriously: it just means that those scouts see two dominant pitches right now and that automatically makes some scouts think of back-of-bullpen pitchers. Elbert probably has another three years of minor league development ahead of him, so he will no doubt continue to refine his delivery and change-up. He is much more athletic than Broxton, and his fastball will never be as good as Broxton's, so it is unlikely the Dodgers will ever see him as closer material. He will stay a starter.

As to what the Dodgers think of Elbert, I just happen to have read from a reliable source that the Dodgers actually think more highly of Elbert than they do Billingsley. Billingsley is of course higher up the food chain, more developed, but the Dodgers think Billingsley is "uncoachable," and he sometimes doesn't get along well with teammates. Elbert also has an easier delivery than Billingsley, and is more athletic. I'm sure Elbert gets bonus points for being left-handed too.

by CanuckDodger on Jan 10, 2006 12:47 AM EST up 0 recs

Dodgers

I would think the Dodgers would take Drew Stubbs. The dodgers biggest need is in outfielders. The only prospect I can think of that they have in CF is Jamie Hoffman, unless you still consider Jason Repko a prospect. Guys like Kemp and Ruggiano seem to profile better on the corners. Stubbs would offer the Dodgers a pure centerfielder as well as a lefthanded power hitter, which they could also use. I dont see them taking a 1B, they seem to really like Loney and have sleeper guys like Dunlap, Sutherland, and Mooneyham in the lower minors and they have a ton of pitching. Then again Logan White might be to tempted to take one of the top high school arms.

by sanchez101 on Jan 9, 2006 6:59 PM EST up 0 recs

stubbs

i think stubbs bats right handed :(

i wish he batted left handed.

by npurcell on Jan 10, 2006 1:59 AM EST up 0 recs

Giants

you know happy I would be if Stubbs fell that far to the Giants?? I cant even begin to explain

Sabean, stop giving away our 1st round draft picks!!

by z4 landshark on Jan 8, 2006 9:03 PM EST 0 recs

well

it's just too bad sabean wasn't allowed to give away the #10 pick. if only they had won a few more games... :)

by jpahk on Jan 9, 2006 12:28 AM EST up 0 recs

Giants?

I don't know anything about HS or College players. I certainly think the Giants should take the best player available regardless of position. All other things being equal, I'm hoping for an impact pitcher who could be ready for the majors within 3 years. An Infielder like Longoria would be welcome too. There's probably no catchers that deserve to go that high, but the Giants have no catching to speak of in their system, maybe a supplemental pick or something in rounds 2-4?

by DrBGiantsfan on Jan 9, 2006 8:54 AM EST up 0 recs

If Dellin Betances drops to the Yankees

He'll be taken easy

But that won't happen.

by PooNani on Jan 8, 2006 9:32 PM EST 0 recs

Totally agree

I was about to say that when I read his mock. The guy's upside is too good to pass up on.

by albo4lyfe on Jan 9, 2006 12:32 AM EST up 0 recs

Betances

Most likely... he won't be there at 29. When I was writing it I moved him back and forth. Had the Blue Jays, Yankees, Red Sox, and Nationals picking him at one point. On many of the prospect lists online and he's viewed as the fifth best high school pitcher available in the draft behind Walden, Drabek, Latos, and Anderson. But I like Kasey Kiker getting taken ahead of him. Could be the fact that the draft crop is pitcher heavy but consists of very few good lefties.

by Angels and Demons on Jan 9, 2006 1:08 AM EST up 0 recs

Kiker

I'm pretty sure his first name is Kasey, not Kris.

by Brickhaus on Jan 8, 2006 9:36 PM EST 0 recs

Kiker

You're right. Thanks.

by Angels and Demons on Jan 8, 2006 9:38 PM EST up 0 recs

the pirates

drafting drabek would not fall in line with their previous high draft picks of college arms.

i dont see the pirates drafting a prep pitcher that high when they havent really done it before.

by npurcell on Jan 8, 2006 10:07 PM EST 0 recs

Mariners

Just a comment about the M's.

The Mariners have very good depth in the middle infield, with Yunkeski Betancourt and Jose Lopez taking over SS and 2B in 2006. They also have Asdrubal Cabrera who can play both positions, as well as a good 2B prospect in Luis Valbuena. They have so many middle infielders, they will be moving Matt Morse, Matt Tuiasosopo and Adam Jones off SS permanently in 2006, with Morse competing for a PT as a utility player and in LF, Jones moving to CF and Tui probably ending up at 3B.

Thus, I don't see the M's taking a middle infielder unless that player was just too good to pass up. Longoria is a nice prospect, but he is not a Justin Upton-type 'can't pass this guy up' prospect.

This draft is deep with college pitchers. The M's have a real need for starters. I could see Scherzer dropping to them because of signability (Boras). Bill Bavasi has done a lot of business with Boras.

If the draft board worked out like you suggest for picks 1-4, I could see them going for Kennedy, Walden, or Morrow.

Also, if the draft were today, I don't see Stubbs lasting past the top 5.

by Jerry on Jan 8, 2006 11:07 PM EST 0 recs

M's

"Also, if the draft were today, I don't see Stubbs lasting past the top 5."

I don't see which team Stubbs would go to if he was drafted in the top five. The Royals, Rockies, and Devil Rays need pitching. The Pirates have Duffy in center as of now and drafted McCutchen last year. I don't see why the Mariners would take as well when they have other needs to address.

But I went with Longoria because the Mariners were rumored to be considering Troy Tulowitzki last year. I'm also not all that sold on Betancourt, Lopez, and Morse but I guess I could see the Mariners drafting a college pitcher.

by Angels and Demons on Jan 8, 2006 11:17 PM EST up 0 recs

The Boras Factor

I have heard that Max Scherzer is being 'advised' by Scott Boras.

Does anyone know of any other draft prospects that he has been linked to?

It would be interesting to know who might fall because of signability.

by Jerry on Jan 8, 2006 11:09 PM EST 0 recs

Boras

I believe Kennedy and Bard are also Boras clients.

by Angels and Demons on Jan 8, 2006 11:19 PM EST up 0 recs

Draft strategy

I see a lot of people saying "xyz team wouldn't draft a hitter cuz they need pitching", or vice versa, or even talking about positions. I think it is well documented, however, that teams almost always draft the best player on the board, for several reasons:

If the Brewers think the best player on their board is a third baseman, and they have a chance to draft him, they shouldn't consider the fact that they havae Ryan Braun. Odds are one of these guys won't make it (maybe even neither of them) so they can't operate under the assumption that Braun will make it. They have to take the best player they have available.
guys change positions all the time. Center-fielders will move to left or right, shortstops end up anywhere from second to third to left, right, and center, etc etc. if you're talking about an athletic guy, he can fill a number of holes for you if he's blocked.
The above two points mention hitting. As far as pitching goes, you can NEVER have enough pitching. Teams will always be willing to trade for pitchers. Yes, even the Dodgers can't have enough pitching, either for the team or as trade chips.

by Jgaztambide on Jan 8, 2006 11:45 PM EST 0 recs

rockies

nice points, that is why for example, even though the Rockies had Clint Barmes and Chris Nelson they went with who they thought was the best and drafted Tulo

Sabean, stop giving away our 1st round draft picks!!

by z4 landshark on Jan 8, 2006 11:54 PM EST up 0 recs

Draft Strategy

"I think it is well documented, however, that teams almost always draft the best player on the board"

I wouldn't say almost always, although it does happen quite a bit. For example, Tulowitzki was viewed as one of top five prospects in the draft by many. As well as Maybin. They fell to the Rockies and Tigers though. Say for instance Miller goes number one and Scherzer goes number two and Stubbs is viewed as the best prospects avaialble. The Devil Rays probably won't draft him because they already have a surplus of outfielders and their biggest need is pitching. A lot of things go into consideration. Such as the teams needs, the best player available, is there somebody already on the roster at that position, how close they are to the majors, and etc...

by Angels and Demons on Jan 9, 2006 1:24 AM EST up 0 recs

Draft order is wrong

I'm pretty certain the draft order you have above is wrong. here are the corrections:

Red Sox Picks 28th, not Atlanta (Jonny Damon comp)
Anaheim Picks 25th (Paul Byrd comp)

Not minor, but should be noted

by Jgaztambide on Jan 8, 2006 11:55 PM EST 0 recs

Doubtful Bard falls that far

I dont see him dropping out ofthe top 10 barring a disaster or crazy bonus demands

by nms on Jan 9, 2006 12:05 AM EST 0 recs

Boras Client

Bard's a Boras client so I can see him still left on the board when the Diamondbacks turn comes around. Plus the fact that his numbers at UNC haven't actually been good. I'm surprised scouts like him so much.

by Angels and Demons on Jan 9, 2006 1:11 AM EST up 0 recs

Good points! :-)

Hello everyone,

Angels and Demons - I agree with Jgaztambide and Rockies73 - I know the Indians ans several other Major League teams (if not all ML teams,) draft on best talent available, not need, unlike the NBA, NFL, and NHL drafts.

Therefore, if you do another mock draft, I would suggest going more on the best talent available at that pick, unless the team is definitely known to lean one way or the other in terms of high school and college, hitting and pitching, drafting for talent or drafting for need, etc.

I know the Indians would likely take a pitcher because this draft is heavy in good pitching, not position players, so unless a position player was the next highest-rated player on their board, they would likely take a pitcher even though their minor league system has more pitching depth than hitting depth at the present time.

Also, Jgaztambide brings up another good point: The Indians don't pick 25th anymore because they signed the Angels' Paul Byrd, who was a Type B Free Agent, meaning that they lose their first round pick to the Angels because the Indians pick in the 2nd half of the first round. Therefore, the Angels pick at #25.

(Also, why are the Nationals listed twice at #15 and #26; I may be drawing a blank, but who did the Angels sign from the Nationals to lose their first-round pick to them; or was that just a typo? If the Angels still have the 26th pick, they would have the 25th and 26th picks back to back because I know they have the Indians' pick at #25 due to the signing of Byrd. I'd appreciate knowing whether I am forgetting an Angels' free agent signing from the Nationals or whether that is a typo. Thanks! :-)

However, Jgastambide, don't you mean that Boston gets the Yankees' pick at #21 for their signing of Johnny Damon, not Atlanta's at #28, since the Yankees signed Damon, not Atlanta?

Angels and Demons - I would also suggest if you make another mock draft to take into account which teams no longer pick in the first round due to free-agent signings - I know the Indians don't now until the supplemental 1st round, while the Yankees don't at #21 (I don't know if they pick at #18 now, the Phillies' pick, because they signed Tom Gordon - I think he was offered arbitration.)

BaseballAmerica.com's recent Ask BA had the free agents arranged by type and also what compensation picks they would yield to the team that lost them. You may want to use that as a basis for your next mock draft and incorporate the new drafting order into your next mock draft.

Overall though, good effort - it's not easy to do it within a week or a month of the draft, let alone 5-6 months - your effort certainly helped us to think about baseball and bridge the gap during this quiet time until Spring Training begins - which I can hardly wait for! :-)

Go Tribe! :-)

Take care and have a great day!

by indiansfan on Jan 9, 2006 1:42 AM EST 0 recs

mock draft

Thanks for updated draft order. I couldn't find it anywhere but I guess I wasn't looking hard enough. The Phillies 18th pick is from the Mets, the Yankees 21st pick is from the Phillies, and the Nationals 26th pick is from the Angels which they recieved after the Angels signed Carrasco. One team's compensation pick can't be given to another team as a compensation pick. Only their original first round pick, second round, third round, etc.

"You may want to use that as a basis for your next mock draft and incorporate the new drafting order into your next mock draft."

Eventually... this is more of a "rough draft". I wanted to get opinions on who one believes would go where and others that were left off. In a few weeks I'll post it on my own blog with scouting reports and stats. An up to date and edited version that is. This one certainly needs a little work.

by Angels and Demons on Jan 9, 2006 2:46 AM EST up 0 recs

Re: draft order

"However, Jgastambide, don't you mean that Boston gets the Yankees' pick at #21 for their signing of Johnny Damon, not Atlanta's at #28, since the Yankees signed Damon, not Atlanta? "

Nope. With compensation for free agents, you can't lose a pick that you got from another team signing your player. The Yankees (before compenstion is taken into acocunt) pick 28th overall. That means that they lose that pick to the team of whoever lost the highest rated FA (according to Elias). For example, they signed Farnsworth and Damon, but Damon was rated higher, so the Sox get the Yanks pick, the 28th, and the Braves get the Yankees' second round pick (sandwhich round is complicated, as well)

The 21st overall pick the Yankees recieved from losing Tom Gordon. That pick is their's no matter what (Unless the Phillies had signed a higher rated free agent, which they didn't and can't cuz Clemens wasn't offered arbitration).

So the Yankees move up by picking 21st instead of 28th (in addition to a sandwhich pick), the Sox pick 27th and 28th, in addition to 2 sandwhich picks for Mueller and Damon. The Braves pickup Yankees second rounder and a sandwhich.

by Jgaztambide on Jan 9, 2006 9:45 AM EST up 0 recs